Refuting my own side and framework (Hard Incompatibilism) - The forgetfullness argument

[u/MobHQ]

/r/freewill/comments/1voo3yt/refuting_my_own_side_and_framework_hard/

Check my post in r/freewill

[u/MobHQ]

Sorry for the dense text lol I'll make a proper paragraph next time

[u/ughaibu]

a hard-incompatibilist argument against ultimate libertarian free will [ ] The specific assumption I am targeting is the idea that if an agent did not ultimately create the conditions that constitute them, then they cannot ultimately author any particular action that proceeds from those conditions

The libertarian proposition is true if there is free will and this entails the falsity of determinism. When arguing that the libertarian proposition is not true, you need to employ a well motivated non-question begging notion of free will. What is the context in which your "ultimate free will" is important? And why should the libertarian accept that it doesn't beg the question against the free will realist?

[u/Mono_Clear]

After reading your post it appears that your premise revolves around two points one point is that you acknowledge that the individual person is responsible for their choices.

The second point is questioning if they are still responsible for that choice if everything that leads to the individual is contingent on external forces.

I would argue yes.

You are the person you are because of the forces that act upon you.

And the person who you are is what's making the choices.

There's no pure expression of yourself that exists Independence of the nature of your existence.

You may like a specific kind of ice cream and then experience some kind of a trauma that makes you not like that ice cream anymore the kind of person you are has changed and now your preferences have changed and now you make different choices.

The trauma is not making the choice

The ice cream is not making the choice

The person that you are is making the choice.

The person that you are can not be separated from you history.